corporate power

• The government approved construction of the disastrous Belo Monte Dam, allowing heavy machinery to break ground on the banks of the Xingu River.
• The Brazilian Congress is on the verge of approving a major rollback of the Brazilian Forestry Code, already causing a huge spike in deforestation.
• Leading forest guardians have been victims of murder and intimidation.

This is one of the defining environmental struggles of our times; the assault on the Amazon must stop!

We, the international community, need to stand in solidarity with the growing numbers of Brazilians calling for environmental sanity and respect for human rights in the Amazon. Together, we can make a difference.

You can help protect the Amazon!

Saturday 20 August will be massive day of action in at least 22 Brazilian cities. Antonia Melo, a key leader of the movement to stop the Belo Monte Dam, has asked people to join her by organising protests around the world on Monday August 22 in front of their local Brazilian Embassy or Consulate.

Take action

Find out where the events are taking place
Download resources for the event you are attending and find out more about the dam
Call on the Brazilian President stop the Belo Monte Dam

Kumi and Ulvar climbed the oil rig, situated 120 km off Greenland coast line, with the aim of handing over a petition signed by 50,000 people from all over the world demanding Cairn publish their oil spill response plan.

They wanted to personally call on Cairn to leave the Arctic.

Speaking moments prior to his arrest Kumi said:

"I did this because Arctic oil drilling is one of the defining environmental battles of our age. I'm an African but I care deeply about what’s happening up here. The rapidly melting cap of Arctic sea ice is a grave warning to all of us."

Friends of the Earth International stands in solidarity with Kumi Naidoo and all the activists arrested during the action. We extend our solidarity to all those who take a stand against against unsustainable practices. We support the right of local communities to reject and resist extractive industry operations that threaten their health and livelihoods. 

We challenge the world's governments to redirect their support towards economic alternatives that could take us towards equitable and sustainable societies. At the same time, we call upon people everywhere to think critically and creatively about what they really need to consume and produce.

Find out more about our work on resisting mining, oil and gas.

CESTA / Friends of the Earth El Salvador has worked closely with Francisco and the Environmental Committee of Cabañas.

Ricardo Navarro, the Director of CESTA, expressed his joy at Francisco's achievement and said that such recognition will strengthen the community and organisations' struggle to prevent mining exploitation in El Salvador. 

Find out more about Francisco Pineda

I would like to introduce an essay from one of our friends, who lives in Iwaki City, 40 km from Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.

Two weeks after the hydrogen explosion at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant building, we've returned to Iwaki City at last. Iwaki is 40 km away from the Fukushima plant and is neither within the 20 km evacuation zone nor within the 30 km safety zone.

However, immediately after the nuclear explosion following the earthquakes and tsunamis, we were not able to determine the degree of risks involved and evacuated to Ibaraki Prefecture, 160 km from Iwaki city.

My wife works at a high school, 34 km from the Fukushima plant. Two days after the evacuation, she insisted on returning to Iwaki City. I was against this. At the time, there'd been a second hydrogen explosion. Upon hearing about this, my wife still persisted with her plans to return and we began to quarrel. One hour after the second explosion, the school finally got in contact with her with an official notice to stay on stand-by and not to return, my wife conceded.

I was relieved to settle this matter. We then began to worry about our cat that was left behind. This cat, being semi-wild, lies idly during the day in the neighboring field and returns home at night. We were certain that she would take refuge in the field and was not likely to starve, thus the problem was her radiation exposure.

The radiation monitoring began in Iwaki City and was reported to be about 1 micro sieverts per hour (Sv/h) in the atmosphere above normal levels. The soil contamination too appears relatively serious. As our cat lives in the field, she must be covered with the dirt. I wonder how much she has been exposed to.

Two weeks later as we returned to Iwaki city, our cat was fortunately alive and well. I wondered what she had been eating. We brought her into the bathroom immediately and washed her with some cat-shampoo. So as not to bring the radioactive material into the house, we had initially decided to wash her outside. However, the joy of finding her alive left us with no such reason.

The hardest part came afterwards. The cat naturally wants to go outside; she kept crying so that we could not keep her indoors any longer. As we told her, "outside you will be exposed to radiation", she would not listen and began rolling around in the field again.

Like many cats, our cat too dislikes getting wet; therefore we cannot wash her every day. We ourselves are wearing masks when outside and we take our clothes off in the entrance hall so as not to bring the radiation material into our bedroom. But is it any good at all if the cat comes in full of dirt?

Thus far when we brought her inside our home, we used disposable body-towels. However, since these towels are relatively expensive, and do not come in large amounts, we opted to use baby-wipes. We soak them very lightly and wipe her three times and needless to say they are then discarded.

We are well aware of the radiation risks and have some knowledge. Yet as we restart our lives, we end up not thinking of this risks as everyday needs and emotional needs take over. People living outside the immediate danger are far more sensitive to such risks. In fact, prior to our return to Iwaki City, our family members and friends living outside Fukushima Prefecture were very concerned and strongly opposed our return.

Despite this, my wife decided to return out of her sense of duty and out of her guilt for left behind. While I, with my affection for our cat, selfishly reasoned that "the plant will not explode immediately," "we can secure the gasoline if needed," "1 micro Sv/h does not present a high risk," and so on.

Upon returning, we found the shelves of the supermarket empty and about 100 cars lined up at the gas station. Yet here the sky is blue, and so ordinary is our everyday it makes it difficult to believe that only 40 km from here are the damaged nuclear plants.

Whether our cat is exposed to radiation is still unknown, and recently we nicknamed her Sievert. More accurately, as the cat is treated as a nuclear material, Becquerel is appropriate. Therefore, we thought of calling her Becky, however, my wife thought Sievert prettier and there was no use in arguing.

By continuing this life, the risk of radiation will be forgotten unless the situation worsens at the plants or until the onset of cancer emerges. I wonder for those who have settled here for good, this may well be a happier life.

Even if her life ends prematurely, our cat might be content to roll around in the field as usual. I too am defeated by my own emotion and no longer troubled by the thought of letting our cat into our home even if this means shortening my life a little.

Photo credit: DigitalGlobe

I have often been upset by so-called 'experts' when I watch nuclear issues being covered on the TV in Japan. 

A nuclear expert who used to work at Toshiba said, one day, 

"Japaese nuclear technique will possibly be praised and we should be proud of it, as we could avoid the worst of the worst." 

How could he possibly say such a thing in such a way, almost ignoring those affected already in many ways!? And, he still continues to be on TV.

Yesterday, another expert on radiation in the sea, said that the fish are safe to eat, as we have already been taking in plutonium previously releaed in the pacific from elsewhere. 

This cannot be the reason why we are safe!! 

I do not blame all the experts. But, it strikes me some experts are exposed to media just to defend safety or protect themselves.

NS

Two major issues marked 2009 and 2010: the financial crisis and the climate crisis. On both fronts corporate lobbying directed to EU decision-makers – in the European Parliament and Commission, but also in national Member States – has been as intense as it was successful. 

• Vote now!
  

The failure of the Copenhagen talks on the one hand, and the lack of strong reforms on the financial markets on the other hand, have demonstrated the strength and the powerful strategies of business when it comes to for-profit lobbying at the expense of more climate- and consumer-friendly regulation. Already, millions of people worldwide are suffering from the consequences. Big business has been profiting at the expense of both people and planet.

That is why this year’s Worst EU Lobbying Awards has a twofold focus: climate and finance. The awards aim to expose and counter the dirty lobbying tactics related to climate change policies and financial regulation in order to make the big business lobby less credible among EU decision-making circles, and to tackle the problem of privileged access to EU decision-makers that these underhand tactics have granted big business.  

However, you can help fix the lobbying mess in the EU! By voting for the worst lobbyists, and sending a message to the European Commissioner in charge of transparency, you are strengthening our campaign for transparent lobbying and the end of privileged access. Not only are you taking part in a massive "name and shame" exercise of the nominees shortlisted this year, but you are also signalling EU decision-makers that they need to take responsibility for the privileged access they allow big business for. Therefore your support is essential! We need your voice to put this message in the priority in-tray of the European Commission.

Time is running out! Voting closes on 26 November! Vote and make a difference!

Find out more about the nominees and cast your vote!

Today the debate is on the Crisis of Civilization and Research for new Paradigms. The day began with a presentation by Roberto Espinoza of the Coordination of Native Andean Organisations. He spoke about the recent resistance in Peru and noted that some of the underlying factors were the privatization of land for agrofuels production as well as moves in the destructive mining sector. The people resisted because their livelihood was being made impossible by the pollution of their waters, land and air. 6000 communities were affected and half of these have their coastline impacted by mining. He mentioned also that oil corporations have appropriated up to 15 million hectares of forest area for their activities.

Roberto stressed that the struggle of the people is not for a mere of government but for a fundamental constitutional review to defend the collective rights of the peoples’.

Speaking further on the subject of today’s debate, he said that the multiple crises the world is faced with today go beyond being a crisis of neo-liberalism. According to him, this is a crisis of civilization with soft words such as climate change being used to describe its manifestations. Man has gradually been separated from nature and consumerism is driving humanity towards destruction. He noted that oil and mining remove the soil on which the peoples depend and that the people need soil not oil!

Human wellbeing cannot be constructed on increased consumption and competition but on solidarity. Everything cannot be a commodity. Commodification leads to expropriation and control. We must defend our diversity in every sphere.

A commentator from Italy noted that what the nation (Italy) was facing is a challenge of democracy and that this is the case with other European nations. He agreed with Roberto that cultural, social and other crises all affect the peoples’ way of life and builds uncertainties and uneasiness. This uneasiness creates fears and tensions and does not create a path for the future. What is needed is a joint project that would pool resources together to effect a radical change in the way we do things. This new path must lead away from free trade, which dissipates nature. This new path must help the people recover their sovereignty from market forces.

He called for cultural change and a new discussion of the very concept of modernity. This must include the recovery of the imagination in a lifestyle that recognises human interdependency with nature.

Another high point of today’s debate was the contribution of the mayor of Iglesias. He captured the multiple crises as one of identity. He rooted his contribution to the historical realities of colonialism and neo-colonialism in Sardinia within the Italian context.

According to the mayor, the local people had over the years got to depend on what they are told was right for them rather than discovering their own realities for themselves. He regretted that today, our world views are framed by what we see on television and unfortunately the medium is largely controlled by those whose desire is to keep us under their control!

The major talked about how an agriculturally prosperous region had their livelihoods disrupted by promises of a better life through mining. While they moved to the mines all they got in return was polluted environments, health problems and a rapacious appropriation of their resources. Even coastlines that served as touristic magnets became damaged by a culture that sees concreting as a measure of development and progress.

An activist or community person from any nation in the global South could have made the mayor’s presentation as they mirrored the exact situation of things today in those climes. We saw in this presentation the clear fact that struggles of the peoples of this world can find common grounds if we are true to our sense of perception and the realities we face.

For those who do not know, Iglesias is a town in Sardinia, an island province in the south west of Italy.

I will pause here.

We are working on the outcome document or declaration for the debates on the post carbon economy. That document will be my final post on the Gsott8.

Saturday, July 4, 2009 was devoted to debates on food sovereignty and the important need for support to be given to smallholder farmers and agro-ecological approaches.

For a large part of the day I was engaged in brainstorming on the massive threats of tar sand/bitumen mining. Specific focus was on the situation in Congo DR where ENI, the Italian oil company, is involved. We particularly looked at the looming dangers to communities and their environment as well as what needs to be done to mobilize them and build resistance.

Lessons were also drawn from the situation in Canada. The moves towards bitumen mining in Nigeria were mentioned including the fact that a committee was set up in 2008 by the government (of Nigeria) to handle the process of bidding for 3 bitumen blocks.

We agreed that sharing of information and experiences would be a good way to move forward.

I should have mentioned that there are three of us here from the FoEI family. Anne-Sophie Simpere of Les Amis de la Terre, France is here. Also here is BAsilo Tzoy Grijalva of the Council for the Protection of the territory of Indigenous people, Guatemala. His organisation related with FoE Guatemala.

Today’s events are organised in panels and will conclude at midnight after the screening of La Ricaduta, a documentary on irresponsible extractions in the Niger Delta.  There will also be a special testimony by a citizen of Abruzzo – the earthquake region where ENI wants to extract crude. The people of Aruzzo don’t want crude extracted from their territory.
As already mentioned in my earlier post, today’s panels are focusing on oil/gas, mining and tar sands. Tomorrow the focus will be on food sovereignty matters. The three cardinal objectives of these sessions are the phasing out of oil economy, keeping the oil in the soil; community control over their resources; new frontier of resource exploitations. The idea is also to strategize on how to find allies and build alliances for the struggle. 

The first panel opened with Tom Kucharz of Ecologistas en Accion, Spain interviewing Ivonne Yanez of Accion Ecologica, Ecuador. The thrust of the discussion was the Ecuadorian Yasuni proposal in which a civil society driven process led the government to state readiness to leave the billion barrels of crude oil in the soil at the protected Yasuni Park. Ivonne traced the history of the campaign and noted that although the government was initially seeking payment for leaving the oil in the ground in a way similar to the carbon trade arguments, this has changed to the demand for solidarity funds to avoid drilling for oil in the area.

The purpose of the Yasuni proposal is to commence a process of breaking the world’s dependence on fossil fuels, and by so doing reduce carbon emissions and directly tackle climate change. She revealed that just a fortnight ago Germany offered to contribute $1Billion to Ecuador at the rate of $50 million per year over the next 20 years – towards leaving the oil in the ground at the Yasuni Park.  This proposal has thus become very concrete.

Nicholas of Corner House interviewed me on the second panel. The thrust of our discussion was our proposal to leave new oil in the soil of the Niger Delta. This proposal is similar to the Ecuadorian proposal but with some key unique aspects. The similarities basically include simply leaving the oil in the soil, defending the environment from degradation related to oil spills and gas flares and also directly tackling climate change. 

I traced the historic struggle of the Ogoni under the leadership of Ken Saro-Wiwa who was executed in November 1995 with the active connivance of Shell. Since 1993 direct oil activities in Ogoni ceased with the expulsion of Shell; and the land has from after the post expulsion conflicts known a measure of peace.

The key demand is that there should be no new oil field developments in Nigeria for the following reasons. Nigeria can easily meet a 3 million barrels production right if the Niger Delta knows some peace. Currently the nation’s production quota stands at 2 million barrels per day with another estimated 1 million barrels of crude stolen on a daily basis. The government has plans to increase daily production to 5 million barrels per day from the year 2015. We propose that Nigerians can contribute funds to keep those additional 2 million barrels per day in the soil. This comes to only $156 per year for each Nigerian. We note that not all Nigerians (for example the children) can make this contribution. But, there are many who can buy multiple units. There are businesses who can but muliple units and there are concerned citizens, organisations and governments of the world who would be willing to contribute to this fund.

The direct implication of keeping new oil in the soil would manifest in reconnection of Nigerians to the national economy. This would raise accountability and transparency in governance. It would also directly move the nation from dependence on one source of revenue and lead to a diversification of the economy in a productive way. FoE Nigeria schedules to present this proposal formally to the federal government of Nigeria by November 2009.

The other panel that shows the people resisting new oil is in Abruzzo, Italy. This is the region where a devastating earthquake occurred recently. Speaking on this was Maria Rita D’Orsagna of the Abruzzo Movement Against Oil Extraction. She said that when the idea of oil production in the area was first announced to the people the general understanding was that it would be the production of olive oil! A strong resistance is building with the realization that it is crude oil that is to be drilled for here.

The struggle against the Shell Pipeline in Ireland was presented by Nessa  Ni Chasaide of Action From Ireland (AFRI) in a day that was loaded with stories of resistance and mobilizations from several countries. The stories of tar sands in Canada and the degradation of indigenous areas were brought by Ben Powless of the Indigenous Environment Network. The mining situation in the Republic of Congo; the situations in Zambia, Guatemala, Philippines and Indonesia all took centre stage. 

The last session of the day was a panel that spoke on alternatives. The ideas that came from this panel were mainly on what people and communities can do to show that alternatives exist and that others can be constructed. The vital need to build movements was stressed. The transition to a post carbon civilization will not be easy, but must be planned for and made to happen. The need for reduced consumption and the need to change from the current fossil fuel intensive agriculture were also brought forward forcefully. Other alternatives included building designs using locally available materials and skills thereby being climate sensitive and reducing dependence of materials transported over long distances.

It was agreed that REDD was not a solution to forest protection or for climate change. The need to reframe the climate debate towards climate debt, equity and justice was emphasised.

The day ended at midnight with the screening of a documentary “La Ricaduta” – a story of irresponsible behaviour of oil companies in the Niger Delta with a special focus on ENI (AGIP).

A statement will emerge from the sessions on extractives. It is in the forge at the moment!
4/5 July will focus on Food Sovereignty issues. La Via Campesina and other groups are driving this section.

It is the 1st of July and we were on our way to the Southern tip of Italy. Getting to Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy, was a fascinating experience. From the aircraft seat, the runway below was clearly in sight but the pilot went a circuitous path before finally touching them smoothly. As we came in, you could see the entire breadth of the Sardinia Island, its rugged mountains and some of its population centres. On this flight were four of us heading for the GSott8: Luca of CRBM, Zakir Kibria of Praxa  Bangla, Bangladesh, Nicholas Hildyard of the Corner House and yours truly.

The welcome party was warm and soon we were on our way to Iglesias…town name and not a bunch of churches, if you get what I mean. The ride ended in a restaurant at the city centre where we did not only dine and wine but began to talk about the events of the next days. By midnight a bunch of us were on our way to Casa di Nonna, a Bed & Breakfast at Villamassargia…,which I thought was a massage home! But it was not…

2nd July broke with a bright sunlight hitting my tightly shut eyes from long before 6 AM. A quick breakfast and we were on our way to a trip to the mines at Monteponi….  Soon helmeted, we entered the belly of the earth though tunnels dug by men from 1882 and from which zinc, copper and lead were mined until 8 years ago. The mines and related infrastructure now serves as the Faculty of Mineralogy of the University of Cagliari where studies are focussed on the mining and other engineering studies.

The mine is as interesting as it is instructive.  Most of its equipment and spare parts were manufactured on the location and once installed were expected to stay in the belly of the earth “for ever.” The mine starts from 150m above sea level and goes down 200m below sea level and required a massive water pumping works to keep the water out of the tunnels and allow the extraction of the vital minerals.

Why was the mine closed? This is the point that is so instructive: the entire operations were so expensive that it did not make economic sense to invest so much resource on it. In other words, it was cheaper to import the zinc, lead and copper that this mine offered than to keep tunneling here. On account of this, and although there is still copper, zinc and lead underground, the mines are shut dues to economic exigencies. On result of this is that the huge labour force that was once employed in the mines were suddenly thrown into the labour market and the towns that grew around the mines are now a shadow of the ebullient selves they must have been in the hey days of hard helmets, picks and hammers.

Lesson learned: just because you have a resource does not mean that you must extract it. Thinking about crude oil: if the true cost of oil were paid, everyone would have left the resource in the soil! But because the crude is extracted from communities of the voiceless, the environmental costs, human rights abuses and the works are conveniently ignored and the world remains stuck on model of civilization that has dragged humanity into a blind corner.

Leave the oil in the soil, the coal in the hole and the tar sand in the land! The day ended with an opening event at the centre of Carbonia, a carbon town or a city built to service coal mines that have also been shut. Leaders of the municipal authorities who also welcomed all to the G8 Underground attended the opening event. This was followed by denunciations of the G8 and a condemnation of the subversion of the democratic systems of Honduras.

3rd July and the G8 Underground is set to focus on oil, gas and mining. We just concluded two interview panels...the first featured Ivonne Yanez of Accion Ecologica, Ecuador  while the second had me on the hot seat and I was interviewed by Nick of the Corner House ... More to come…

• For live streaming visit www.gsotto.org